If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the forum FAQ and the House Rules and Forum Guidelines.
You will have to register before you can post. If you find your registration is rejected, please try again using a different username. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Still think Rooney should be in the team, he's one of few players that are top notch players in the team. But due to his creativity and passing range his best position is probably as a deep-lying striker now, sort of biding midfield and attack - like he has played for United this season. Whether he can play in that role depends on the tactic of course, but leaving him out of the national team would be a very odd choice in my opinion.

A midfield of Cleverley, Parker and Wilshere would be excellent though, and is perhaps the best England can muster now (and it's far from crap). That midfield three would have both grit, ball retention and creativity, and would look a lot more modern than Gerrard and Lampard.

One could also go with for example Parker and Wilshere as the central two, with Rooney ahead of them linking midfield and attack. Then Welbeck or perhaps Sturridge up front (IMO he is best centrally but hasn't been given a proper chance there yet). With Young on the left and one of the Arsenal duo on the right (think I'd prefer Oxlaide actually as he is a more intelligent footballer to me). That wouldn't be a bad bunch either.

Untypically, England are actually a little short at the back right now, which is probably why Terry is still in with a shout. Going with a central pair of Smalling and Cahill wouldn't be bad, with Jones as contender or starter, or even as right back (he is too marauding at CB for me right now, leaving dangerous gaps). Cole isn't the player he was but is perhaps still the best there, so that would make a team like this. Just a suggestion

Probably not a team that would beat the best in the world, but England doesn't have players capable of doing that consistently anyway. This would give them a lot more energy with younger and more motivated players, of a more modern mould. Get this lot playing together for the next two years and see what they can do in Brazil. (With the slight caveat of Parker's (and Cole's) state in two years).

Of course, the press would be over them like a pack of wild dogs should they draw a game against, well, anyone really, so a new manager would have the biggest balls in the business if he would do something like this and stick with it.

Rooney is an excellent footballer and the type of player you should be able to build a team around. My problem is that when you do that the opposition know exactly how to beat you - give Rooney a few knocks and he'll eventually retaliate and get himself sent off. Or even banned for the entire group phase of an upcoming international tournament. The solution would be to keep him in the squad and probably the side but not as the fulcrum. If he's the gravy rather than the meat and potatoes he becomes less of a target.

England have to come up with a style of play that suits most of their better players and then stick with it, rather than pick their best 11 players and then think about the formation later (as I suspect Redknapp will almost certainly do). The system you moot, Pangaea, is actually pretty much the system we used to great effect in World Cup qualifying, except with obviously a more goalscoring-oriented forward. The one issue with the system is Rooney's replacement when he's suspended/out of form/injured. Gerrard is the obvious choice but Liverpool don't even use him there any more. I suspect his legs are going.

I think we should go for a 2007-era Man Utd sort of system. 4-3-3 with the front 3 all working hard and swapping positions. Young, Rooney, Sturridge and I suspect Oxlade and Johnson would all be comfortable with this. Then a midfield of Parker, Cleverley and Wilshere would have a lovely blend of creativity, ball retention and presence for difficult games, whilst you could bring in a box-to-boxer for the games where we'll expect to be on the front foot and need support getting to the front 3 more often.

Just watching the Daily Politics, aside from McLaren being conveniently forgotten with the 'time for an english manager', Nigel Farage genunely said that 'no one could have done a worse job that Capello' and that caused me to say a rather loud 'What!' (which is mostly the only way I react when watching tv, but rarely that strong).

Both a fluid 4-3-3 and the 4-2-3-1 can work well, and England have the players for it. Think both Cleverley and Wilshere can replace Rooney in the latter system as they are offensively minded and creative. Gerrard used to be very good in that role, but he isn't the player he was either.

It would fly right in the face of going "Germany", but given his statements after the WC and coming out of retirement, I wonder if Scholes would be interested this time around. Not a bad guy to have around in the squad given his creativity and ability to control the pace of a game.

Agree delta, people are jumping on Capello's back now, and have for quite some time, but he has actually done well with England. He is of course tainted by the heavy loss to Germany, but that was (and is) a great side filled with enormous talent. It took Spain to beat them, and they only did by 1-0 if I remember correct. It's an ungrateful job to have, and he hasn't been treated the way he deserves, just like practically every England manager the last 10-20 years.

Watching TV isn't good for your mental health. Too much crap on there with seemingly the only point to get your blood flowing, either via hot chicks or idiotic statements like the one you mention.

Oh god yes! And we had Les Ferdinand and Andy (I'm not calling you Andrew so give it up) Cole in the form of their lives who couldn't even get in the side.

Originally Posted by Pangaea

Both a fluid 4-3-3 and the 4-2-3-1 can work well, and England have the players for it. Think both Cleverley and Wilshere can replace Rooney in the latter system as they are offensively minded and creative. Gerrard used to be very good in that role, but he isn't the player he was either.

It would fly right in the face of going "Germany", but given his statements after the WC and coming out of retirement, I wonder if Scholes would be interested this time around. Not a bad guy to have around in the squad given his creativity and ability to control the pace of a game.

Agree delta, people are jumping on Capello's back now, and have for quite some time, but he has actually done well with England. He is of course tainted by the heavy loss to Germany, but that was (and is) a great side filled with enormous talent. It took Spain to beat them, and they only did by 1-0 if I remember correct. It's an ungrateful job to have, and he hasn't been treated the way he deserves, just like practically every England manager the last 10-20 years.

Watching TV isn't good for your mental health. Too much crap on there with seemingly the only point to get your blood flowing, either via hot chicks or idiotic statements like the one you mention.

I'd say Cleverley possibly could play the link role but Wilshere would find it difficult. He's very much a deep-lying midfielder, no matter how much the English media like to paint him as some sort of creative genius laying on assists and goals by the dozen. He retains the ball well and sets the tempo but he's not the final-ball guy. As much as he probably could be given the range of his abilities, it'd be shoehorning another square peg into a round hole.

I think Scholes would be excellent to have as a non-playing squad member (non-playing not because he'd be poor but because we have to look forward) to set an example and help guide a new generation of players in avoiding the pitfalls of international football.

My major problem with TV debate is that conjecture passed as fact, unfounded opinions and downright lies go around completely unchallenged. People have been saying that Capello wanted to keep Terry as captain after a mistranslation has gone completely unchecked and is now accepted as what he actually said. Capello only said that it should have been his decision and not the FA's, and that they created a problem for him. Morons like the guy deltablue mentioned spout absolute rubbish and noone pulls them up on it. It's almost like they're doing improv where you can never say no. If people were called out to back up their ridiculous assertions then they'd be rightly made to look like fools and their stupid opinions would be devalued as they should be. Since there's no challenge it becomes the accepted view and people will just blindly agree.

Perhaps it's linked to the culture of anti-intellectualism in this country. It's so deep seated that a word like "clever" has negative connotations. "He's been clever there". "Too clever by half".

Bobby Robson, Graham Taylor, Sven Goran Eriksson, Fabio Capello. Four genuinely top-class football managers in my lifetime with outstanding records before taking the England job who were vilified by the press, two of whose career was effectively ruined by it. You'd have thought that calling for Robson's head for years only to see England reach the semi-finals in 1990 would be enough to make the papers have a look at themselves but they've only gotten worse. People showered him with spit because the papers told them he was useless for god's sake.

We as a nation didn't deserve any of those four men. Far too good for us to a man.

Agree with everything there except for the inclusion of Graham Taylor as a 'genuinely top class football manager'.

Pre-England he had three management positions, promotions with each including Division 4 to Division 1 in 5-seasons with Watford, Division 1 runners-up with Watford, and Villa, and an FA Cup final with Watford as well. The only team stopping him winning a Division 1 title with Watford (I keep repeating it because it's bloody Watford) was Bob Paisley's Liverpool.

Pre-England he had three management positions, promotions with each including Division 4 to Division 1 in 5-seasons with Watford, Division 1 runners-up with Watford, and Villa, and an FA Cup final with Watford as well. The only team stopping him winning a Division 1 title with Watford (I keep repeating it because it's bloody Watford) was Bob Paisley's Liverpool.

Top-class.

Didn't he do so with extremely unsophisticated 'route one' tactics at a time when the English game was itself quite tactically unsophisticated?

Wasn't he more or less found out at international level when managing England?

I was aware that his club management record was pretty impressive but I don't think he was what I would call top class. English football was in a very different state in this era. It also seems to me that he was left found wanting in a big way whilst managing England.

I won't pretend to be an expert. Some of his exploits with Watford, I know little about, and I certainly wasn't old enough to experience them first hand. I do, however, remember much of the England era under Taylor - I was old enough then - and to quote the man himself, 'do I not like that'!

That documentary following Taylor's 1994 World Cup Qualifying campaign with England doesn't paint a good picture of the man either. Some of the footage of him on the bench shows him to be way out of his depth both tactically and otherwise!

Have you seen the full documentary that those clips are taken from? I have. Clearly he's no Sacchi in terms of his tactics, but there's a couple of bits in there where he's giving specific instructions to the players, and the next bit is footage for the game where the players do the exact opposite of what he's asked them to do. So he was probably a good fit in terms of sophistication really. My favourite bit in fact is where he gives substitute Nigel Clough a 10-15 second description of where he wants him to play, I think it basically boiled down to the base of a midfield diamond to allow Gascoigne more freedom. Clough's response? "...So you want me to play on the left?"

I'd definitely recommend watching it, the interactions with the press are very interesting as well.

What I find even more gutting to Capello's treatment by the press, is how Eriksson was hounded out. He was downright vilified by the press en masse - after taking England to three consecutive tournament quarter finals. Okay, so he misused Paul Scholes and tried to shoehorn Lampard and Gerrard into the team (a recurring theme for England managers). But you can't argue with his results.

Managing England is a poisoned chalice. It's a nightmarish media circus that only Real Madrid can approach.

Partly I think the media love-in with Redknapp right now is because they know he'll give them headlines and they can tear into him like no tomorrow, like they are used to. He will make statements they can make soundbites and big-font headlines out of. I wish him the best of luck if he takes on the job either soon or after the Euros. He sure as hell will need it.

What are your thoughts on Martin O'Neill. Think he has done very well up through the years and is a very good manager. Wouldn't mind seeing him take the job, though I guess it's not very likely given he has just taken over Sunderland.

Have you seen the full documentary that those clips are taken from? I have. Clearly he's no Sacchi in terms of his tactics, but there's a couple of bits in there where he's giving specific instructions to the players, and the next bit is footage for the game where the players do the exact opposite of what he's asked them to do. So he was probably a good fit in terms of sophistication really. My favourite bit in fact is where he gives substitute Nigel Clough a 10-15 second description of where he wants him to play, I think it basically boiled down to the base of a midfield diamond to allow Gascoigne more freedom. Clough's response? "...So you want me to play on the left?"

I'd definitely recommend watching it, the interactions with the press are very interesting as well.

Originally Posted by SnakeXe

Just found the other bit I like:

Training ground: "We don't want to get caught on the break."

Match: England give away possession and get caught on the break.

Training ground: "Don't give away any silly fouls."

Match: Ince gets booked and suspended for a needless foul.

Perhaps top class is a bridge too far, but he certainly was no turnip.

Yeah, I've seen the full documentary.

Agree with the last line of your post.

Moving on, who does everyone want for England now? Harry Redknapp seems the popular choice.

I'm kind of excited about the idea of Redknapp for England. Could it be Terry Venables and Euro '96 all over again? In a way, it does remind me of the that era. There are slight parallels at least anyway.

Don't get me wrong, I don't think England will dramatically improve or have any amazing success with Redknapp in charge. But I do think we know what we'll get from Redknapp. He is a no nonsense manager who you suspect will motivate the players and manage with some much needed common sense. I'd be very interested to see where we would go with Redknapp in charge. I have a feeling we wouldn't exactly move forward very much but that watching England might become more entertaining and enjoyable at the least.

What I find even more gutting to Capello's treatment by the press, is how Eriksson was hounded out. He was downright vilified by the press en masse - after taking England to three consecutive tournament quarter finals. Okay, so he misused Paul Scholes and tried to shoehorn Lampard and Gerrard into the team (a recurring theme for England managers). But you can't argue with his results.

Managing England is a poisoned chalice. It's a nightmarish media circus that only Real Madrid can approach.

Partly I think the media love-in with Redknapp right now is because they know he'll give them headlines and they can tear into him like no tomorrow, like they are used to. He will make statements they can make soundbites and big-font headlines out of. I wish him the best of luck if he takes on the job either soon or after the Euros. He sure as hell will need it.

What are your thoughts on Martin O'Neill. Think he has done very well up through the years and is a very good manager. Wouldn't mind seeing him take the job, though I guess it's not very likely given he has just taken over Sunderland.

Eriksson's treatment was certainly despicable. I think with just a couple of slices of extra luck we could have quite possibly won something under him. Certainly we would have reached a couple of semi-finals. World Cup 2002 we'd have had a much better chance with a fully fit Beckham, and Gerrard didn't even make the squad IIRC - I'd certainly have backed us to do better against a 10-man Brazil with those two fit and firing. Euro 2004 obviously the injury to Rooney totally threw us off when we were playing the best football out of anyone. I really thought we'd win that one if we were going to win anything at the time. World Cup 2006 was Rooney being stupid, Owen being injured, and Carragher forgetting that you have to wait for the whistle. Although to be fair he made a rod for his own back in that tournament by taking Walcott and then not using him once.

If I were Harry I'd stay well away. He's got an excellent job at Spurs with a fantastic team and board that give him their full backing. I've got no love for old melty-face but I wouldn't wish the England job on my worst enemy.

I think we have to be quite careful about discussing Martin, he's got good (and vigilant) lawyers. He's done a good job wherever he has gone, and whilst as a Newcastle fan it pains me to say it, clearly Sunderland are one of the best teams in the country right now. Again I wouldn't wish it on anyone, but if we're merely discussing who would do the best job regardless of availability, he should be in that discussion.

Moving on, who does everyone want for England now? Harry Redknapp seems the popular choice.

I'm kind of excited about the idea of Redknapp for England. Could it be Terry Venables and Euro '96 all over again? In a way, it does remind me of the that era. There are slight parallels at least anyway.

Don't get me wrong, I don't think England will dramatically improve or have any amazing success with Redknapp in charge. But I do think we know what we'll get from Redknapp. He is a no nonsense manager who you suspect will motivate the players and manage with some much needed common sense. I'd be very interested to see where we would go with Redknapp in charge. I have a feeling we wouldn't exactly move forward very much but that watching England might become more entertaining and enjoyable at the least.

Harry Redknapp is the media's choice. Be careful not to confuse that with popular opinion.

I think short term we'd be much like we were under Sven. We'd probably get through the group stage and maybe beat a slightly weaker or similar team in the knockouts if they're having an off day. Under his management any decent side would annihilate us. He just doesn't have the tactical nous to set up a defence against a top side. See Real Madrid v Spurs. It'll be nice to not have a massive cloud of negativity surrounding every England game, but that's entirely a construct of the media anyway.

Ditch the old guy, besmirch his reputation, ignore his successes, bleat about his failures; find the new guy, sell him as the best manager, laud his successes, ignore his failures, wait until he gets a poor result then rinse and repeat. If the definition of insanity is repeating the same course of action expecting different results then they're all batshit mental.

Ditch the old guy, besmirch his reputation, ignore his successes, bleat about his failures; find the new guy, sell him as the best manager, laud his successes, ignore his failures, wait until he gets a poor result then rinse and repeat. If the definition of insanity is repeating the same course of action expecting different results then they're all batshit mental.

Even though I reckon Redknapp will take the job, I don't think he's the step forward that the FA needs to take. Unfortunately, I feel he'll fall back on the old brigade of Lampard, Ferdinand, Terry etc, unwilling to take the risk needed on some of the youngsters. At least Capello had started to learn the lessons of the World Cup, recognising the fact that Ferdinand, Lampard and the like, were past their best, and was starting to blood players such as Cleverly, Walker, Smalling, Jones into the squad, knowing that this crop of players would be needed for the future.

I'd see Redknapp's appointment as a short-term solution, lasting no longer than Euro 2016. I'd much rather the FA appointed someone younger, with a pedigree of developing a team over a number of years. I'm also not that bothered if they're English or not; they just need to have a revolutionary approach and be willing to take a risk.

For some reason I love headed goals from open play on FM, they don't happen too often and I find most goals are either a nice striker finish or a long shot. Goals like these I love more than any other type.

I love a lovely swirling cross from deep clattered in by a striker or the opposite winger at the far post - as you say they're quite rare in FM so that makes them even more enjoyable.

Originally Posted by AK22

Even though I reckon Redknapp will take the job, I don't think he's the step forward that the FA needs to take. Unfortunately, I feel he'll fall back on the old brigade of Lampard, Ferdinand, Terry etc, unwilling to take the risk needed on some of the youngsters. At least Capello had started to learn the lessons of the World Cup, recognising the fact that Ferdinand, Lampard and the like, were past their best, and was starting to blood players such as Cleverly, Walker, Smalling, Jones into the squad, knowing that this crop of players would be needed for the future.

I'd see Redknapp's appointment as a short-term solution, lasting no longer than Euro 2016. I'd much rather the FA appointed someone younger, with a pedigree of developing a team over a number of years. I'm also not that bothered if they're English or not; they just need to have a revolutionary approach and be willing to take a risk.

Will the FA have the balls to do this? I very much doubt it.

Each England manager is a reaction to the previous one. Eriksson's cool and calculated approach was the opposite of Keegan's one-of-the-lads schtick. McClaren was the Englishman who would shout and have passion on the touchline after Eriksson's dodgy untrustworthy foreign-ness. Capello was the disciplinarian after "Stevie G and JT" McClaren was too cosy with his players. Now we'll get another shouty passiony English tactical neanderthal after Capello the dodgy untrustworthy foreign does-he-even-care-about-the-job (not like he missed his son's wedding to take charge of an England friendly) useless manager who anyone could have done better than even though he's the most successful manager of the last 20 years.

We occasionally get the manager we need by accident and then hound him out for the manager we deserve because everything he doesn't do must be the answer. He must be sacrificed and his grave danced on merrily by fat sports editors up and down the country.

We had the manager we needed, it's now time for the one we deserve. God help us.

Martin O'Neill would be perfect for England great man management and can get the best out of youth players and would give them a chance to have a strong and internationaly experienced squad. But not going to happen.

Agree with AK22 think Redknapp would go back to the old boys but get them playing better so short term would likely be better but need the young players getting bleed in. Capello left a philosophy of how to play from the back which is the right idea but never got it fully in place feel next manager needs to take from that but give more freedom higher up the pitch. Redknapp is the best British choice maybe available so can see why he fav.

Even though I reckon Redknapp will take the job, I don't think he's the step forward that the FA needs to take. Unfortunately, I feel he'll fall back on the old brigade of Lampard, Ferdinand, Terry etc, unwilling to take the risk needed on some of the youngsters. At least Capello had started to learn the lessons of the World Cup, recognising the fact that Ferdinand, Lampard and the like, were past their best, and was starting to blood players such as Cleverly, Walker, Smalling, Jones into the squad, knowing that this crop of players would be needed for the future.

I'd see Redknapp's appointment as a short-term solution, lasting no longer than Euro 2016. I'd much rather the FA appointed someone younger, with a pedigree of developing a team over a number of years. I'm also not that bothered if they're English or not; they just need to have a revolutionary approach and be willing to take a risk.

Will the FA have the balls to do this? I very much doubt it.

That's what worries me too with him. Capello had started to blood in the talented youngsters now, so what England need is to continue that development. I'd like to see him drop Terry, Rio and Lampard in particular, and perhaps even Gerrard. Get in the new generation right away. Unfortunately I don't think Harry will do that. I can see him taking all four oldies to the Euros and starting them.

Like SnakeXe says, Capello is what England needed. Now he has left the circus tent so it's time for some other monkey to dance.

Once again, the FA does a splendid job. As does the gutter press. In four month's time they'll be ridiculing the new guy, which is probably Redknapp. Soon after that, at the latest when England crash and burn in Brazil, they'll be asking for a foreign manager with mettle again.

It's like a grown-up version of taking a toy from a kid that she isn't playing. "Ueeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!!! I want that!!!" There's just a bit of delay between the removal of the toy and the uncontrollable cries and rants.

Okay, so I'll just give my opinion on the Capello debate seen as I haven't been around this past day

In my eyes, the FA have done us over again. Giving Capello a new contract before the World Cup was ridiculous, he then went and failed in South Africa although in my eyes he did well as I wasn't expecting us to get out of the group stages. However, there was a lot of pressure on him and Germany had an excellent team, a team we should be looking to take at the Euros. When I say team, I mean youngsters with the odd old head there. They had the pace and experience to wipe us aside. Just look at our goalscorer in that game: Matthew Upson. Has he featured in the squad since? No, I don't think so. When Sven(?) took Walcott to the 2006 World Cup he was doing the right think, a youngster at that age would have hugely benefited from it and maybe should have started 1 of the group games but where it went wrong was not taking him to the next World Cup. Now what I'm saying is this: you take players that have great potential and are young enough to feature in the next World Cup European Championship whatever. Walcott did little if anything in 2006 but if he'd have gone in 2010 he'd have had the experience, the homesickness etc wouldn't be there and then would be a much better player. Do you see what I'm saying?

Now if I was the manager of England now, I would take players such as Alex Oxlade Chamberlin, Daniel Sturridge and Danny Welbeck. Lampard, Gerrard, Rooney etc have had their chance, they've done nothing. These youngsters that are coming through should go to the European Championships, get the tournament experience and then go to the World Cup. Do you really think Lampard and Gerrard will be going to Brazil? I don't. If we take a 23(?) man squad to these European Championships and only 13 or so go to World Cup then the team is yet again not as strong/bonded. If we take a whole bunch of youngsters with old heads that deserve to captain and play for their country (Scott Parker for one example) then the next World Cup when the youngsters are settled Premier League players with 10/20 England caps under their belt and that tournament experience then maybe we will get further than the Quarters? I think we would. Again I hope you all see what I'm saying.

Now on the Capello matter, I'm glad he's gone. I didn't like his style of play and the fact he's Italian. The next manager has to be English and shouldn't be Harry (come on, he's guility). But I don't hold anything against Capello, he was right to stand down and was unfairly treated by the media. Headlines such as: EASY when the World Cup group stage came out was not neccessairy at all, like the calling the baby Rooney advert. That still doesn't make me think I'm being harsh that I'm happy he has gone. Yes okay, we beat Spain but if you look at the stats of the game I think they had 65% maybe 70 of the possession, 20 odd shots at goal and we had about 3. In any competitive game the Spanish players would have murdered us.

We didn't even comfortably qualify for the Euros, we drew with Montenegro, we drew with Switzerland in a game where he tried out the odd different player and we had nothing upfront apart from the 2 goals and the D. Bent miss. Then if we'd have played Wales (H) when they had hit the gold with that fine play and great football they would have taken points from Wembley. We were edgey and easy to score past all the way through the qualifiers and I reckon we'll be mullered in the Championships.

Stuart Pearce should be the next England manager in my eyes, give him a contract till September (none of this temporary crap) give him a full time, permenant contract till September. Let him take the youngsters he knows so well to the Euros, expect to struggle in the Group Stages and then make sure the FA and him communicate on what his plans for the World Cup are. Tell him they don't want odd players picking up odd caps etc. I think it will benefit us greatly. An example of a waste of a cap (or however you want to put it), Kevin Davies, you can argue he deserved the 30 minutes run out but it's not as though he has been seen in the England set up since. I think I've made my point

Okay, maybe I rambled a bit but I love a debate where I have a strong opinion on and I thought I'd share my view with you. Just one example of a strong bonded team: (well 2), there was a country (Russia region) that played the best club team players in their league with the tactics formation etc because they were all that nationallity (it might have been Albania). Also the Spanish set up is brilliantly, English clubs are allowed to call back players from U21,20 and 19 tournaments. It resulted in around 70 call backs from clubs in the U20 World Cup. What use is that to us? It's not. In Spain you're not allowed to do that so the first team players have played a lot and I mean a lot of Under 20's etc games, if the same players are playing with the same people all the way through to the first team it's going to mightly benefit them and you can't say it wont because look at Spain: European Champions 2008, World Champions 2010. Okay we don't have them quality players but I believe we could make it to the Semis at least with a strong bonded team, which we haven't had for years.

I agree in general with most of that post HC, but there's a few bits I just can't agree with.

Originally Posted by HotChocolate

In my eyes, the FA have done us over again. Giving Capello a new contract before the World Cup was ridiculous, he then went and failed in South Africa although in my eyes he did well as I wasn't expecting us to get out of the group stages.

Huh? So he failed by meeting expecations?

It wasn't a new contract, they just removed the clause whereby either party could end the contract after the World Cup. Considering we'd just qualified in spectacular style and Inter were sniffing around it was the right thing to do. Not one of the moron tabloids complained at the time, now it's a convenient stick with which to beat Capello and the FA. Of course, governing by hindsight is a piece of urine (stupid swear filter).

However, there was a lot of pressure on him and Germany had an excellent team, a team we should be looking to take at the Euros. When I say team, I mean youngsters with the odd old head there. They had the pace and experience to wipe us aside.

That same Germany team that the "expert pundits" in the studio were saying they wouldn't swap a single member of England's team for. Even at the time it sounded like the ravings of a madman to anyone with a half-serviceable knowledge of football, let alone the Bundesliga. That kind of lunacy is exactly the problem.

When Sven(?) took Walcott to the 2006 World Cup he was doing the right think, a youngster at that age would have hugely benefited from it and maybe should have started 1 of the group games but where it went wrong was not taking him to the next World Cup. Now what I'm saying is this: you take players that have great potential and are young enough to feature in the next World Cup European Championship whatever. Walcott did little if anything in 2006 but if he'd have gone in 2010 he'd have had the experience, the homesickness etc wouldn't be there and then would be a much better player. Do you see what I'm saying?

They should get the tournament experience as a member of the youth squads, you cannot afford passengers at the senior tournament if you have any aspirations of doing well. Instead all of the decent players pull out. Spain had players who had won the World Cup with the senior side the year before playing at the U21 Euros in 2011. England's squad barely had a cap between them. Utter self-defeating idiocy, a massively important stage of their development as international players is devalued to the extent that the likes of Wilshere pull out because they've been capped a couple of times for the seniors and it's all beneath them now. I notice you mention this later, but I think it needs to be added in to this part of the discussion.

Now if I was the manager of England now, I would take players such as Alex Oxlade Chamberlin, Daniel Sturridge and Danny Welbeck. Lampard, Gerrard, Rooney etc have had their chance, they've done nothing. These youngsters that are coming through should go to the European Championships, get the tournament experience and then go to the World Cup. Do you really think Lampard and Gerrard will be going to Brazil? I don't. If we take a 23(?) man squad to these European Championships and only 13 or so go to World Cup then the team is yet again not as strong/bonded. If we take a whole bunch of youngsters with old heads that deserve to captain and play for their country (Scott Parker for one example) then the next World Cup when the youngsters are settled Premier League players with 10/20 England caps under their belt and that tournament experience then maybe we will get further than the Quarters? I think we would. Again I hope you all see what I'm saying.

I agree with you on this, but because Oxlade, Sturridge and Welbeck are in fantastic form and deserve to be in the squad, not so they can go along and not get on the pitch.

Now on the Capello matter, I'm glad he's gone. I didn't like his style of play and the fact he's Italian. The next manager has to be English and shouldn't be Harry (come on, he's guility).

I'm staggered at the outright xenophobia here.

Yes okay, we beat Spain but if you look at the stats of the game I think they had 65% maybe 70 of the possession, 20 odd shots at goal and we had about 3. In any competitive game the Spanish players would have murdered us.

They didn't muster a single decent chance apart from that Fabregas one at the end. We shut them down highly effectively, nicked a goal, and held it resolutely. It was a fantastic performance which you can't ignore simply because it was a friendly.

We didn't even comfortably qualify for the Euros

Last time I checked we qualified unbeaten, sounds pretty cushy to me.

Stuart Pearce should be the next England manager in my eyes, give him a contract till September (none of this temporary crap) give him a full time, permenant contract till September.

Why the hell not? Jurgen Klinsmann did a great job with Germany at Euro 2008 with no management experience, so why not Psycho? There's no way in hell we'll win it, but then we wouldn't win it with a proper manager anyway so I think this is a great idea. For Pearce however it'd be moronic. Why risk your status as an England legend? You'll only become a pariah, even if you do well and get us to three quarter finals in a row. No, you'll have Ian Wright telling the world what an idiot you are and his mutually sycophantic co-pundits sniggering in the background as they have a massive circle-jerk over your lynched, lifeless career.

An example of a waste of a cap (or however you want to put it), Kevin Davies, you can argue he deserved the 30 minutes run out but it's not as though he has been seen in the England set up since. I think I've made my point

Very true but I wouldn't say Capello made a habit of that sort of thing.

Okay, maybe I rambled a bit but I love a debate where I have a strong opinion on and I thought I'd share my view with you. Just one example of a strong bonded team: (well 2), there was a country (Russia region) that played the best club team players in their league with the tactics formation etc because they were all that nationallity (it might have been Albania). Also the Spanish set up is brilliantly, English clubs are allowed to call back players from U21,20 and 19 tournaments. It resulted in around 70 call backs from clubs in the U20 World Cup. What use is that to us? It's not. In Spain you're not allowed to do that so the first team players have played a lot and I mean a lot of Under 20's etc games, if the same players are playing with the same people all the way through to the first team it's going to mightly benefit them and you can't say it wont because look at Spain: European Champions 2008, World Champions 2010. Okay we don't have them quality players but I believe we could make it to the Semis at least with a strong bonded team, which we haven't had for years.

They weren't really my 'expectations' as such, I was just not getting my hopes up. The general expectation was pretty high, if I remember correctly.

It wasn't a new contract, they just removed the clause whereby either party could end the contract after the World Cup. Considering we'd just qualified in spectacular style and Inter were sniffing around it was the right thing to do. Not one of the moron tabloids complained at the time, now it's a convenient stick with which to beat Capello and the FA. Of course, governing by hindsight is a piece of urine (stupid swear filter).

Okay, fair enough. But still, I wouldn't have changed the contract, giving him the option to quit and us to sack him after should have appealed to them and if they were to do it then they should have done it after the World Cup, I know that kinda defeats the object of the clause anyway.

That same Germany team that the "expert pundits" in the studio were saying they wouldn't swap a single member of England's team for. Even at the time it sounded like the ravings of a madman to anyone with a half-serviceable knowledge of football, let alone the Bundesliga. That kind of lunacy is exactly the problem.

I honestly think the German team was pretty decent and had the pace of the youngsters and the experience of the old heads. It definitely was a lot better than our team.

On that day, I would have prefered (from the England team) Cole, Terry, Lampard, Rooney (for England he is shocking, for Man Utd he is good, I personally wouldn't play him for England because he doesn't seem to get the quality like he does for Man Utd).

They should get the tournament experience as a member of the youth squads, you cannot afford passengers at the senior tournament if you have any aspirations of doing well. Instead all of the decent players pull out. Spain had players who had won the World Cup with the senior side the year before playing at the U21 Euros in 2011. England's squad barely had a cap between them. Utter self-defeating idiocy, a massively important stage of their development as international players is devalued to the extent that the likes of Wilshere pull out because they've been capped a couple of times for the seniors and it's all beneath them now. I notice you mention this later, but I think it needs to be added in to this part of the discussion.

I wouldn't take them as passengers, I would have started Walcott for one of the group games in Germany, I would have given him match time. Or bring him on every game for the last 20 minutes? Let him rip the defence apart with his speed. He got nothing (I can't remember if he never played or got 10 minutes).

I agree with you on this, but because Oxlade, Sturridge and Welbeck are in fantastic form and deserve to be in the squad, not so they can go along and not get on the pitch.

I'd play them, I never thought of taking them without playing them. Sorry should have made that clear.

I'm staggered at the outright xenophobia here.

There are many reasons why I wouldn't take Harry, I would just be repeating opinions heard for ages. I think he's guiltily and it was just a blunt way of putting my opinion Not that seriously said.

They didn't muster a single decent chance apart from that Fabregas one at the end. We shut them down highly effectively, nicked a goal, and held it resolutely. It was a fantastic performance which you can't ignore simply because it was a friendly.

I just can't see how defending for a whole game and scoring the one chance we got was really 'good' as such. We deserved to win but I'm not sure it was that good of a performance anyway. I wouldn't want to see us try and win things with 1 goal wins, put it that way.

Last time I checked we qualified unbeaten, sounds pretty cushy to me.

We were against small teams (no offence to them) but they still managed to scare us a little and be the better team on the day. If you're not performing but winning (qualifying) you'll get undone soon, fast and embarrassingly i.e. the Germany result.

Why the hell not? Jurgen Klinsmann did a great job with Germany at Euro 2008 with no management experience, so why not Psycho? There's no way in hell we'll win it, but then we wouldn't win it with a proper manager anyway so I think this is a great idea. For Pearce however it'd be moronic. Why risk your status as an England legend? You'll only become a pariah, even if you do well and get us to three quarter finals in a row. No, you'll have Ian Wright telling the world what an idiot you are and his mutually sycophantic co-pundits sniggering in the background as they have a massive circle-jerk over your lynched, lifeless career.

I'm slightly confused here, I think Pearce should get the job and he shouldn't be expected to do much in this upcoming Euros but in the next World Cup I'd let him do the business and judge him afterwards.

Very true but I wouldn't say Capello made a habit of that sort of thing.

Maybe not a habit, but he did it and it annoyed me once or twice, you shouldn't be looking to give people 'playing time' if they aren't going to feature in the tournaments. Apart from a long list of injuries in the striking set up, Davies wont ever get near the Euros and never will have.

They weren't really my 'expectations' as such, I was just not getting my hopes up. The general expectation was pretty high, if I remember correctly.

The general expectations were indeed high, but that doesn't make them the right barometer. Loads of people thought the Earth was flat. We fell one match short of the best we could realistically expect to do, which when you turn up with one key player injured and two hopelessly out of form isn't terrible. Look at Newcastle against Fulham and Brighton for how a good team with a good manager shorn of one centreback, and two forwards in abject form can look awful.

Okay, fair enough. But still, I wouldn't have changed the contract, giving him the option to quit and us to sack him after should have appealed to them and if they were to do it then they should have done it after the World Cup, I know that kinda defeats the object of the clause anyway.

Why would it appeal to them then? He had just led us through a spectacularly good qualifying campaign, he'd done an excellent job. In hindsight they (wrongly for me) wanted to get rid after the tournament, but who the hell saw that coming?

There are many reasons why I wouldn't take Harry, I would just be repeating opinions heard for ages. I think he's guiltily and it was just a blunt way of putting my opinion Not that seriously said.

No, xenophobia is referring to not liking Capello because he's Italian. You may be of the opinion that each team should have a manager of the same nationality (I happen to agree), but that's not the rules (so we should pick the best manager regardless of nationality or else put ourselves at a disadvantage), so you cannot use Capello's nationality as a stick to bash him with.

I just can't see how defending for a whole game and scoring the one chance we got was really 'good' as such. We deserved to win but I'm not sure it was that good of a performance anyway. I wouldn't want to see us try and win things with 1 goal wins, put it that way.

Because we won against a team of far superior individual ability. If Fleetwood went to Old Trafford and won 1-0 with their only chance of the game, restricting Man Utd to one decent chance would that not be good? It was a fantastic defensive performance against a far superior side - exactly the sort of performance we'd need to get past that sort of team at the Euros, because we sure as hell aren't outplaying anyone.

We were against small teams (no offence to them) but they still managed to scare us a little and be the better team on the day. If you're not performing but winning (qualifying) you'll get undone soon, fast and embarrassingly i.e. the Germany result.

Slight little-Englander mentality bleeding in there, just because Montenegro's ranking is artificially low for the moment doesn't mean they're not an excellent side. The Swiss have some wonderful players as well, and Wales were putting together a brilliant team under Gary Speed (RIP). Any qualification (let alone unbeaten) is a good qualification. Just ask Steve McClaren.

I'm slightly confused here, I think Pearce should get the job and he shouldn't be expected to do much in this upcoming Euros but in the next World Cup I'd let him do the business and judge him afterwards.

I don't disagree, I probably didn't make it clear. I don't think Stuart Pearce should want the job (I certainly wouldn't in his position), not that people shouldn't want Stuart Pearce to take it.

The general expectations were indeed high, but that doesn't make them the right barometer. Loads of people thought the Earth was flat. We fell one match short of the best we could realistically expect to do, which when you turn up with one key player injured and two hopelessly out of form isn't terrible. Look at Newcastle against Fulham and Brighton for how a good team with a good manager shorn of one centreback, and two forwards in abject form can look awful.

No it doesn't make it the right barometere, you are correct. I just felt/feel that the football we played under him was quite poor, a bit boring to watch and he didn't really have a plan b. He also chose the wrong players in my eyes and I would have chosen a younger squad as I said.

Why would it appeal to them then? He had just led us through a spectacularly good qualifying campaign, he'd done an excellent job. In hindsight they (wrongly for me) wanted to get rid after the tournament, but who the hell saw that coming?

No one saw it coming, I just thought at the time as I do now that offering someone a new contract (changing the contract) before a major tournament isn't the best idea, especially with it being his first tournament in charge. If he did well or was unlucky then you can look at giving him a new contract at the end, after looking at everything. They may have realized then that he wasn't the man for the job. It's almost similar to the Steve Kean at Blackburn, he was bottom at Christmas so what did they do? Change his contract, he accepted and they might have got away with it but if they were still as bad as they were then there would be uproar.

No, xenophobia is referring to not liking Capello because he's Italian. You may be of the opinion that each team should have a manager of the same nationality (I happen to agree), but that's not the rules (so we should pick the best manager regardless of nationality or else put ourselves at a disadvantage), so you cannot use Capello's nationality as a stick to bash him with.

Each team should have their own nationality as a manager yes. But I wasn't using it to 'bash him with' I was just saying I didn't like the fact he was Italian and was managing England. This is the same as Sheffield United: I don't like the fact Danny Wilson is a Sheffield Wednesday fan etc and is managing us BUT I love the way Danny Wilson has got us playing and the position we are in. IF Capello had got us playing good football and winning games well then yes I would like him and the fact he's Italian would make little if any difference to my judgement. I said it the wrong way and I didn't mean I don't like him because he's Italian, I meant: I didn't like the way he had us playing and the fact he's Italian managing England is annoying. Thats how I should have said it.

Because we won against a team of far superior individual ability. If Fleetwood went to Old Trafford and won 1-0 with their only chance of the game, restricting Man Utd to one decent chance would that not be good? It was a fantastic defensive performance against a far superior side - exactly the sort of performance we'd need to get past that sort of team at the Euros, because we sure as hell aren't outplaying anyone.

I know you've said you can't use friendlies as a reason but I would like to see us try that sort of tactic out against a team like Spain in a tournament (well I wouldn't because we would probably lose) and I don't think England beating Spain (any competition, at Wembley) is anywhere near Fleetwood going to Old Trafford and winning (more than likely in the cup). If you are going to use Man Utd as Spain then I'd say Blackburn for us a better comparison

Slight little-Englander mentality bleeding in there, just because Montenegro's ranking is artificially low for the moment doesn't mean they're not an excellent side. The Swiss have some wonderful players as well, and Wales were putting together a brilliant team under Gary Speed (RIP). Any qualification (let alone unbeaten) is a good qualification. Just ask Steve McClaren.

I do believe that us, Spain, Netherlands, France, Italy, Portugal, Germany should almost walk qualification. Some of them did and have before, I'm not saying Montenegro are a poor side or Wales I'm just saying if we took the approach teams like that did then we should beat them rather than underestimating them and bringing players in such as Kevin Davies or Darren Bent (and not using them on a regular basis).

I do believe that us, Spain, Netherlands, France, Italy, Portugal, Germany should almost walk qualification. Some of them did and have before, I'm not saying Montenegro are a poor side or Wales I'm just saying if we took the approach teams like that did then we should beat them rather than underestimating them and bringing players in such as Kevin Davies or Darren Bent (and not using them on a regular basis).

Sorry to butt into the dialogue here (), but I want to comment on this paragraph.

This kind of mentality among fans and media is why England always "underperform" (sic). Or rather, why England are perceived to underperform. The countries you mention either have a good chance to win the World Cup, or can do it if things go their way. Except England. Short of a Greece-style miracle, England can't win the World Cup. They simply don't have the players for it. That may sound harsh, but it's easier to observe that from outside England than inside it. England is a tier 2 team that should be expected to get to the second round of the World Cup and arguably also the quarter final (with a lucky draw at least). But one can't realistically expect more than a quarter final outing. Spain, Netherlands, France, Italy and Germany, however, should expect a semi final and all have the ability to win every tournament they take part in. Spain are obviously in a great position right now, mind. France isn't quite what they were either tbh.

All the people discussing here seem to agree the new England manager should go for youth and ditch the old geezers. That doesn't mean England will actually copy Germany and play the pants off other teams, but it's a fresh start that I think will do them good. There are some exciting players there, and some would cope well among Spanish or German players too, but overall I still don't think the English players coming through has the technical ability of the ones coming through in Spain and Germany, so we're likely to see basically the same over the next decade as the past. There is a time for everything, however, and I feel it's time for Rio, Lampard and Terry to have played their last cap, and perhaps also Gerrard (he isn't half the player he was). Cole and Parker are the only old guys off the top of my head that should stay. Plus Rooney ofc, but he is only 26 so it's harsh to call him old.

This way a new crop of players will start playing with each other now, as a unit. Keep playing them together for 2 years straight and we'll see what they can do in Brazil. One of the advantages of particularly Spain is that it's virtually half of Barca and half of Real playing in the national side, so they all know each other well and how they like to play. Easier to quickly get on the same wavelength in tournaments then. Some of the same in Germany, but there it's due to extreme professionalism and focus on system and tactics all up through the youth teams. Something England also desperately needs.

I guess the summary of what I'm saying is that England need to start learning from the best in Europe and the world, and stop having this holier-than-thou attitude. The bottom line is that England isn't good enough to win tournaments. If they want that to change, they need to look at the countries who are good enough and learn lessons from them.

A step in the right direction has been made with the ditching of the 90 minute rule and increasing the coaching hours for kids and youths, but a lot more needs to be done. The FA need to grow a pair and start changing what hasn't worked for well over a decade. Cooperate better with clubs, pump out a lot of top quality coaches with all the right badges and courses. And perhaps most important of all, FA/clubs need to get kids working technique around the clock up to about 14-16 years, on small pitches. This is what Man Utd have been doing the last 10 or so years under Warren Joyce's guidance, and it's starting to give results now. I don't know about other clubs, but that is what needs to happen. Stop worrying about physique, physique, physique. That will come with time. If you want to succeed in the future, make bloody well sure the players are incredibly good technically with a mature football brain between their shoulders. That is the main reason, in my opinion, why Spain and Germany are currently spanking England (bar the much-talked about friendly).

This got a little (a lot) longer than intended, but hopefully there is sense in what I wrote, and what I had in mind got across okay.

Part of the problem for England, IMO, is how blinkered much of the media is there. There's no willingness to admit there's quality football being played elsewhere (see the "EASY" headline, the "best league in the world" nonsense, etc.)

Someone can fill in the names for me, but weren't some of the BBC or ITV presenters actually laughing at one of their studio pundits for actually bothering to do research on the Slovenian and Algerian players?

No it doesn't make it the right barometere, you are correct. I just felt/feel that the football we played under him was quite poor, a bit boring to watch and he didn't really have a plan b. He also chose the wrong players in my eyes and I would have chosen a younger squad as I said.

The players barely grasped his Plan A, so I'm not surprised he didn't manage to work out a Plan B before the World Cup. He was in the process of creating a Plan B (i.e. without Rooney) before he walked. We played excellent football in World Cup qualifying, and sporadically in the Euro qualifying. However it's a results business, if he'd gone for a better style of play but we'd failed to qualify for either tournament it would have cost the FA significantly more than the entire salary they've paid him over the four years. I wouldn't be surprised if they said "get us to the tournament, we don't care how". In fact I'd put money on it.

No one saw it coming, I just thought at the time as I do now that offering someone a new contract (changing the contract) before a major tournament isn't the best idea, especially with it being his first tournament in charge. If he did well or was unlucky then you can look at giving him a new contract at the end, after looking at everything. They may have realized then that he wasn't the man for the job. It's almost similar to the Steve Kean at Blackburn, he was bottom at Christmas so what did they do? Change his contract, he accepted and they might have got away with it but if they were still as bad as they were then there would be uproar.

They were operating under the assumption that since we'd played good football and qualified well that we would play well at the World Cup. A good World Cup would make the clubs sniffing around him more likely to swoop, and the FA would have looked like idiots as the best coach we've had since Robson walked away for nothing. In hindsight the World Cup went slightly wrong (not terribly as the media would have you believe), so perhaps they wouldn't have minded if he'd headed off to Inter. With the information available at the time, though, I don't believe anyone would consider it a bad decision.

Each team should have their own nationality as a manager yes. But I wasn't using it to 'bash him with' I was just saying I didn't like the fact he was Italian and was managing England. This is the same as Sheffield United: I don't like the fact Danny Wilson is a Sheffield Wednesday fan etc and is managing us BUT I love the way Danny Wilson has got us playing and the position we are in. IF Capello had got us playing good football and winning games well then yes I would like him and the fact he's Italian would make little if any difference to my judgement. I said it the wrong way and I didn't mean I don't like him because he's Italian, I meant: I didn't like the way he had us playing and the fact he's Italian managing England is annoying. Thats how I should have said it.

Fair enough, it just came off a bit little-Englander-dodgy-foreigners. However, as I said, with the rules as they are we have to go for the best manager available. Teams like Italy, Spain and Germany have the luxury of top-class coaches of their own nationality, we don't. Redknapp is the closest thing we have and he's won one trophy in 30 years. I absolutely agree the rules should be changed, because if the players have to be English why shouldn't the manager? But you work within the laws you're given.

I know you've said you can't use friendlies as a reason but I would like to see us try that sort of tactic out against a team like Spain in a tournament (well I wouldn't because we would probably lose) and I don't think England beating Spain (any competition, at Wembley) is anywhere near Fleetwood going to Old Trafford and winning (more than likely in the cup). If you are going to use Man Utd as Spain then I'd say Blackburn for us a better comparison

Well we never will know unfortunately. I personally think that's the only way we'd get a result against a Spain or Germany in a tournament. What would you propose, out of interest?

I do believe that us, Spain, Netherlands, France, Italy, Portugal, Germany should almost walk qualification. Some of them did and have before, I'm not saying Montenegro are a poor side or Wales I'm just saying if we took the approach teams like that did then we should beat them rather than underestimating them and bringing players in such as Kevin Davies or Darren Bent (and not using them on a regular basis).

Pangaea absolutely nailed the response to this so I won't go into too much depth, suffice to say that Holland failed to qualify for World Cup 2002, France have limped through the last few qualifying campaigns, and Portugal were absolutely on the edge for Euro 2012. Two qualifying campaigns under Capello, one unbeaten and the other with only a loss when it didn't matter. I'd love to see a comparison between those nations for performance in the last two qualifying tournaments because I bet you we'd be in the top 3.

Originally Posted by Jason the Yank

Someone can fill in the names for me, but weren't some of the BBC or ITV presenters actually laughing at one of their studio pundits for actually bothering to do research on the Slovenian and Algerian players?

Yeah I remember that, I think it was Mark Lawrenson (who is the absolute epitome of the "show up without having done any research and spout lazy cliches whilst gazing lovingly into Hansen's eyes" school of punditry the BBC seem to think our license fee should be wasted on) to Lee Dixon (of course one of the better pundits). Yet another example of the rampant anti-intellectualism in Britain and British football in particular I was talking about earlier.

I must just say this is an excellent discussion guys, I couldn't have this on any other forum I visit

I must just say this is an excellent discussion guys, I couldn't have this on any other forum I visit

Void post here, but I just have to say I wholeheartedly agree with this. Have followed and participated a little in the discussions in the Football Forum, but it's a pointless exercise. People are more interested in ranting over his wage, the loss to Germany, playing poorly, underperforming, etc. Basically the mentality I talked about in the post above, and that Jason more succinctly sums up.

Fair point Pangaea and I agree with almost everything you say. However, I'm not saying I expected us to walk qualification and do well in the major tournaments I'm saying if we did what almost every country did then we'd be much better. As you rightly pointed out about the Spanish side basically being Barcelona and Real Madrid we'll never have anything like that because how many English players play abroad? Almost none. How many of them have been in the England set up? None. The only exception was David Beckham. So that leaves us with the Premier League to get the English players, but wait, the clubs have been going round Europe and buying the best Spanish/Italian/Brazilian etc players. Around half of the players that will play in todays Premier League games will be English. Around 90% of the players that play in this weekends La Liga games will be Spanish. This is probably the main reason we aren't getting the quality through. The FA introduced the Home Grown players rule, it has done nothing because when they introduced it, everyone was abiding to it anyway so no one had to change anything. They should increase the amount of home grown players in the starting 11 and subs by 1 every year till a certain number, that way there would be more emphasis on getting good English players into the squad. Again, I'm not saying we should be one of the best teams in the World but we can be, if only the FA took note of what to do (as you stated).

Originally Posted by SnakeXe

The players barely grasped his Plan A, so I'm not surprised he didn't manage to work out a Plan B before the World Cup. He was in the process of creating a Plan B (i.e. without Rooney) before he walked. We played excellent football in World Cup qualifying, and sporadically in the Euro qualifying. However it's a results business, if he'd gone for a better style of play but we'd failed to qualify for either tournament it would have cost the FA significantly more than the entire salary they've paid him over the four years. I wouldn't be surprised if they said "get us to the tournament, we don't care how". In fact I'd put money on it.

That's true but it also shows what I've just said to Pangaea about the FA, I think we all seem to agree that the FA could do a better job and I agree with what you say about them saying: Get us to the tournament. But we are more than a qualifying team, we can go far and like Holland could have a great year (with a bit of luck) and reach the final of the Euros/World Cup. Do you not think the players couldn't grasp Plan A because he could never speak proper English? It must be a downfall, having to have a translator giving the orders to the team and he never really learned the English language, which he should because he had plenty of spare time.

They were operating under the assumption that since we'd played good football and qualified well that we would play well at the World Cup. A good World Cup would make the clubs sniffing around him more likely to swoop, and the FA would have looked like idiots as the best coach we've had since Robson walked away for nothing. In hindsight the World Cup went slightly wrong (not terribly as the media would have you believe), so perhaps they wouldn't have minded if he'd headed off to Inter. With the information available at the time, though, I don't believe anyone would consider it a bad decision.

I can see where you're coming from but I'm just not sure it was the best decision to go with, I can't remember my re-action at the time when he got the revised deal so I can't really say whether I've changed my mind or not but it hasn't turned out to be the best decision although I don't think the FA could have seen what was going to come.

Fair enough, it just came off a bit little-Englander-dodgy-foreigners. However, as I said, with the rules as they are we have to go for the best manager available. Teams like Italy, Spain and Germany have the luxury of top-class coaches of their own nationality, we don't. Redknapp is the closest thing we have and he's won one trophy in 30 years. I absolutely agree the rules should be changed, because if the players have to be English why shouldn't the manager? But you work within the laws you're given.

I don't think winning things is the best way to see who is a good manager or not. If Harry Redknapp gets the Manchester United job and is given the same time and money Fergie has got then I'm sure he could build a great squad and go and win things, in my eyes Redknapp is one of the best club managers around but a lot of his success has come from his brilliant dealings in the transfer market which unfortunately you don't have in the international set up. I'm honestly not sure who would be the best England manager but I don't think it would be Redknapp because of he is a club manager, nothing more. That being said, I'll hold all judgement till the end of the World Cup in Brazil on the next England manager.

Well we never will know unfortunately. I personally think that's the only way we'd get a result against a Spain or Germany in a tournament. What would you propose, out of interest?

If you are on about how would I try and beat Spain then I'd have players like Cahill at CB, Johnson and Cole at the full backs, Parker in CM with Wilshere (when fit obviously) with Oxlade Chamberlin and Young on the wing with Sturridge and Welbeck upfront. (If Wenger had used Walcott as a ST rather than a winger then I reckon he'd have got more hat-tricks than just the one against Croatia as I firmly believe Walcott could be a world class striker but just not a good winger, he has 13% cross completion and one of the reasons for that in my eyes is he's to fast for everyone else, he gets to the crossing position but no one is there to get on the end and he has shown he can score great goals, but it's a lot harder from RM/RW than ST although that's another debate).

I must just say this is an excellent discussion guys, I couldn't have this on any other forum I visit

Part of the problem for England, IMO, is how blinkered much of the media is there. There's no willingness to admit there's quality football being played elsewhere (see the "EASY" headline, the "best league in the world" nonsense, etc.)

To be fair, you are only describing a certain section of the media here. You are describing typical headlines from trashy tabloid newspapers such as The Sun!

We do have quality sports writing in this country, you know! I think you're being a little unfair about the media here. We have some of the best football writers in the world (and also some of the worst too no doubt!) and they definitely shouldn't be tarnished with the same brush as the sensationalised tabloid rags!

And even though I agree that most of our BBC and ITV pundits are terrible, even they - as ignorant as they can be - are willing to admit to the quality of football in other countries. The way they fawn over Spain is pretty pathetic to be honest!

Originally Posted by SnakeXe

Teams like Italy, Spain and Germany have the luxury of top-class coaches of their own nationality, we don't. Redknapp is the closest thing we have and he's won one trophy in 30 years. I absolutely agree the rules should be changed, because if the players have to be English why shouldn't the manager?

Completely agree. We should have an English manager. I'm not a xenophobe - far from it - but I do feel strongly that international sides should have a coach of that same nationality in charge of their team if possible. Perhaps for smaller nations without a major football culture, a foreign coach is a must in order to bring experience and to provide a learning experience for future coaches. But I'd suggest that even then it should be a short-term solution. With a football culture like we have in our country, there is no excuse for us not to work towards having a home grown manager to represent our country. As you say SnakeXe, it's the English national team with English players so surely it should be an English manager too!

And the key question is: why don't we have top class coaches of our own? That's one major problem that needs to be addressed. There was some statistic that came out after the World Cup in 2010 and it suggested that we have a mere fraction of the number of qualified coaches when compared to some of the other major footballing countries. This needs to change. We need to bring through more coaches and managers for the future and they need to be educated, qualified and given their chance to manage in English club football.

Yeah I remember that, I think it was Mark Lawrenson (who is the absolute epitome of the "show up without having done any research and spout lazy cliches whilst gazing lovingly into Hansen's eyes" school of punditry the BBC seem to think our license fee should be wasted on) to Lee Dixon (of course one of the better pundits). Yet another example of the rampant anti-intellectualism in Britain and British football in particular I was talking about earlier.

The BBC are pretty awful and like the rest of you I feel pretty ripped off to think my license fee is being spent on people like Alan Shearer and Mark Lawrenson giving me their 'insight'. ITV is even worse and I actually refuse to watch football on that channel these days as it is so terrible. At least we do have the occasional decent pundit on BBC and, as you point out, Lee Dixon seems to be one of the better ones.

But I really don't think the media is the main issue here. I mean, are you honestly telling me that other major footballing countries don't have the same pressure from their media when they go into major tournaments? Take Italy, for example, they have daily newspapers dedicated to football meticulously detailing every single aspect that you can possibly imagine to fill out their columns! I can't honestly believe that our media is the fundamental problem here. Yes, we have attitudes that need to be changed across football and not just in the media, but let's get down to the main issues here.

Until we sort out the fundamentals of the national game, we'll always be stuck behind the major footballing powers. I'm talking about issues such as youth football, coaching qualifications, the pathway for coaches and managers to get experience in club football, the FA's National Football Centre and so on and so forth. Then there is the issue of the Premier League (or as Brian Glanville has it, 'the greed is good league'). Do clubs need a proper incentive to bring through young home grown players? Would a proper cap on foreign players help the prospects of the national team? The Premier League has its own agenda and it seems very little that it does helps the national game.

Until we sort out the fundamentals of the national game, we'll always be stuck behind the major footballing powers. I'm talking about issues such as youth football, coaching qualifications, the pathway for coaches and managers to get experience in club football, the FA's National Football Centre and so on and so forth. Then there is the issue of the Premier League (or as Brian Glanville has it, 'the greed is good league'). Do clubs need a proper incentive to bring through young home grown players? Would a proper cap on foreign players help the prospects of the national team? The Premier League has its own agenda and it seems very little that it does helps the national game.

Good point about the media to be fair, it can be pretty mental elsewhere too, such as in Italy or Brazil (from what I hear). There is just so much sensationalism in the UK media though, it's "always" a huge high or a huge low. Some proper analysis and half-decent objectivity wouldn't go astray. The media seemingly just waiting for a big name player to fail and then stick the dagger in his wound and whirl it around has got to affect them in some way.

But your last paragraph is what I think is most important, and I tried to focus on that in the big-ish post above. This is the area where English footballers fall hopefully far behind the good sides on the continent and across the pond. Being good with the ball at your feet and thinking quickly is almost alfa and omega in today's fast-paced football. It takes a ridiculous amount of hours of practice to get to the required level, plus a sizeable talent. Players like Wilshere, Rooney and Cleverley are pretty good with the ball at their feet, but these are the exceptions rather than the rule. This is what the clubs and England youth teams need to focus a lot more on if they want to become better.

The key really lies in becoming much better with the ball individually, and putting such players into a well-thought out and modern tactical system, with flair players that can break the gridlock. England have good enough players for the route one football (little harsh, but it's all relative) to work well in qualifying, but when they're up against the top teams in tournaments they either can't retain the ball or they can't effectively break them down. The last World Cup provided ample evidence of both scenarios.

... how many English players play abroad? Almost none. How many of them have been in the England set up? None. The only exception was David Beckham. So that leaves us with the Premier League to get the English players, but wait, the clubs have been going round Europe and buying the best Spanish/Italian/Brazilian etc players. Around half of the players that will play in todays Premier League games will be English. Around 90% of the players that play in this weekends La Liga games will be Spanish. This is probably the main reason we aren't getting the quality through. The FA introduced the Home Grown players rule, it has done nothing because when they introduced it, everyone was abiding to it anyway so no one had to change anything. They should increase the amount of home grown players in the starting 11 and subs by 1 every year till a certain number, that way there would be more emphasis on getting good English players into the squad. Again, I'm not saying we should be one of the best teams in the World but we can be, if only the FA took note of what to do (as you stated).

There's three things at play here: a lack of English players playing abroad; a relative lack of English players in the Premier League; and a lack of quality coming through the youth teams.

I'm not sure the second one is really that relevant to the England side because the kind of player who will be good enough to play for England will always get noticed - the cream definitely rises to the top.

The first one is more relevant to the personal and technical/tactical development of the players once they're established professionals. I think the issue is that players get into a comfort zone in the Premier League and don't see a reason for them to leave. Hopefully we'll see the new generation of more technically able players like Sturridge, Wilshere and Johnson head abroad at some point, but I won't hold my breath. It's a shame because it really improved Beckham's game, and Joe Cole has been reborn at Lille.

The third is the absolute crux of it I think. The French are starting to see the same sort of problem with their youth system. They prioritised strength and power for too long in young players so they're slightly lacking the more technical players. I read a great article about it in The Blizzard (Issue Two I think), basically you have a kid who looks amazing at U19 because he can physically bully the other players, but as soon as he steps up to U21 or senior then suddenly the other players are just as strong and they realise they never had to develop their touch and skill. Players like Marvin Martin, Kevin Gameiro, and Antoine Griezmann were rejected for being too small, now they're some of the best technical French players. Griezmann had to go to Spain to get a chance in football.

We have to really look at our youth coaching and make sure players are getting the right advice from the youngest age, developing the skills they will need, and not discriminating based on size. As crouchy says, a big problem is the number of qualified coaches. I can't remember the exact figures but the difference between England and Spain is staggering. But the issue with this is we probably won't see the fruit of any positive change now for a generation.

That's true but it also shows what I've just said to Pangaea about the FA, I think we all seem to agree that the FA could do a better job and I agree with what you say about them saying: Get us to the tournament. But we are more than a qualifying team, we can go far and like Holland could have a great year (with a bit of luck) and reach the final of the Euros/World Cup. Do you not think the players couldn't grasp Plan A because he could never speak proper English? It must be a downfall, having to have a translator giving the orders to the team and he never really learned the English language, which he should because he had plenty of spare time.

He spoke English plenty well enough, I'm sure he spoke it far better than he let on in press conferences. His disdain for the media is well documented. If anything he probably speaks it better than some of the players! I think the issue is frame of reference. In England they're used to the 'Arry school of "f-ing run about a bit Pav" rather than the more studied approach that Capello and others have on the continent.

I don't think winning things is the best way to see who is a good manager or not. If Harry Redknapp gets the Manchester United job and is given the same time and money Fergie has got then I'm sure he could build a great squad and go and win things, in my eyes Redknapp is one of the best club managers around but a lot of his success has come from his brilliant dealings in the transfer market which unfortunately you don't have in the international set up. I'm honestly not sure who would be the best England manager but I don't think it would be Redknapp because of he is a club manager, nothing more. That being said, I'll hold all judgement till the end of the World Cup in Brazil on the next England manager.

Redknapp just isn't competent enough with tactics to be a top class manager. The players may like his uncluttered approach but that will only get you so far. Given the same start Ferguson had at Man Utd I doubt Redknapp would have won a thing.

If you are on about how would I try and beat Spain then I'd have players like Cahill at CB, Johnson and Cole at the full backs, Parker in CM with Wilshere (when fit obviously) with Oxlade Chamberlin and Young on the wing with Sturridge and Welbeck upfront. (If Wenger had used Walcott as a ST rather than a winger then I reckon he'd have got more hat-tricks than just the one against Croatia as I firmly believe Walcott could be a world class striker but just not a good winger, he has 13% cross completion and one of the reasons for that in my eyes is he's to fast for everyone else, he gets to the crossing position but no one is there to get on the end and he has shown he can score great goals, but it's a lot harder from RM/RW than ST although that's another debate).

See what happened at White Hart Lane yesterday for what happens when a decent side turns up at an excellent side with two strikers and two attacking wingers. I really cannot see that approach working in the slightest.

Originally Posted by crouchaldinho

To be fair, you are only describing a certain section of the media here. You are describing typical headlines from trashy tabloid newspapers such as The Sun!

We do have quality sports writing in this country, you know! I think you're being a little unfair about the media here. We have some of the best football writers in the world (and also some of the worst too no doubt!) and they definitely shouldn't be tarnished with the same brush as the sensationalised tabloid rags!

And even though I agree that most of our BBC and ITV pundits are terrible, even they - as ignorant as they can be - are willing to admit to the quality of football in other countries. The way they fawn over Spain is pretty pathetic to be honest!

It's the section of the media that the general populace listen to though, that's the problem. There are some absolutely outstanding sports journalists in this country but jingoistic idiots like Steven Howard at the Sun are the ones with influence. It's such a shame.

And the key question is: why don't we have top class coaches of our own? That's one major problem that needs to be addressed. There was some statistic that came out after the World Cup in 2010 and it suggested that we have a mere fraction of the number of qualified coaches when compared to some of the other major footballing countries. This needs to change. We need to bring through more coaches and managers for the future and they need to be educated, qualified and given their chance to manage in English club football.

Totally right.

Yes, we have attitudes that need to be changed across football and not just in the media, but let's get down to the main issues here.

Until we sort out the fundamentals of the national game, we'll always be stuck behind the major footballing powers. I'm talking about issues such as youth football, coaching qualifications, the pathway for coaches and managers to get experience in club football, the FA's National Football Centre and so on and so forth. Then there is the issue of the Premier League (or as Brian Glanville has it, 'the greed is good league'). Do clubs need a proper incentive to bring through young home grown players? Would a proper cap on foreign players help the prospects of the national team? The Premier League has its own agenda and it seems very little that it does helps the national game.

Bang on again.

Originally Posted by Nobby_McDonald

Taylor was a lot better manager than a lot of people credited him for. If you listen to his analysis during Five Live commentaries you can tell he has deep knowledge of the game.

That was the point I was trying to make

Originally Posted by Pangaea

The key really lies in becoming much better with the ball individually, and putting such players into a well-thought out and modern tactical system, with flair players that can break the gridlock. England have good enough players for the route one football (little harsh, but it's all relative) to work well in qualifying, but when they're up against the top teams in tournaments they either can't retain the ball or they can't effectively break them down. The last World Cup provided ample evidence of both scenarios.

There's three things at play here: a lack of English players playing abroad; a relative lack of English players in the Premier League; and a lack of quality coming through the youth teams.

I'm not sure the second one is really that relevant to the England side because the kind of player who will be good enough to play for England will always get noticed - the cream definitely rises to the top.

The first one is more relevant to the personal and technical/tactical development of the players once they're established professionals. I think the issue is that players get into a comfort zone in the Premier League and don't see a reason for them to leave. Hopefully we'll see the new generation of more technically able players like Sturridge, Wilshere and Johnson head abroad at some point, but I won't hold my breath. It's a shame because it really improved Beckham's game, and Joe Cole has been reborn at Lille.

The third is the absolute crux of it I think. The French are starting to see the same sort of problem with their youth system. They prioritised strength and power for too long in young players so they're slightly lacking the more technical players. I read a great article about it in The Blizzard (Issue Two I think), basically you have a kid who looks amazing at U19 because he can physically bully the other players, but as soon as he steps up to U21 or senior then suddenly the other players are just as strong and they realise they never had to develop their touch and skill. Players like Marvin Martin, Kevin Gameiro, and Antoine Griezmann were rejected for being too small, now they're some of the best technical French players. Griezmann had to go to Spain to get a chance in football.

We have to really look at our youth coaching and make sure players are getting the right advice from the youngest age, developing the skills they will need, and not discriminating based on size. As crouchy says, a big problem is the number of qualified coaches. I can't remember the exact figures but the difference between England and Spain is staggering. But the issue with this is we probably won't see the fruit of any positive change now for a generation.

I agree with everything you say there.

He spoke English plenty well enough, I'm sure he spoke it far better than he let on in press conferences. His disdain for the media is well documented. If anything he probably speaks it better than some of the players! I think the issue is frame of reference. In England they're used to the 'Arry school of "f-ing run about a bit Pav" rather than the more studied approach that Capello and others have on the continent.

I'm not saying he didn't speak it well enough but at the start of his tenure he had to use a translator and then his English never got 'brilliant' or 'really good'. Take Mancini for example, granted he's working in England day in, day out and it's slightly different but he has picked up the English language well and can banter with English journalists which for me shows how well he grasped the language. Capello probably isn't a bantering guy anyway but you could see he sometimes struggled to think of the words he was saying. In the dressing room if he's trying to moativate them and he has to stop half way through 'err, erm, what is the word I am looking for?' then it probably doesn't have the effect that he wanted to give out, same as tactics.

Redknapp just isn't competent enough with tactics to be a top class manager. The players may like his uncluttered approach but that will only get you so far. Given the same start Ferguson had at Man Utd I doubt Redknapp would have won a thing.

I think he is, this point seems to be a debate we'll never agree on because I think he is brilliant club manager and could manage Tottenham to the Premier League trophy or any other team that lets him spend a bit of money.

See what happened at White Hart Lane yesterday for what happens when a decent side turns up at an excellent side with two strikers and two attacking wingers. I really cannot see that approach working in the slightest.

That is true, however if we went with the attacking approach then maybe, just maybe we might have won another group game and came top, meaning we'd have faced Ghana (granted they were brilliant in the World Cup) but it would have been an attackive Ghana side against an attackive English side and I reckon we'd have had the quality to beat them. Same as if we'd been more attackive against the Germans, they ended up whitewashing us with the pace and power they had. If we'd have gone for it at 0-0 and 2-0 then the game would have been different and the scoreline would have been a lot closer in my eyes.

Also, I wouldn't play Sturrdige, Oxlade Chamberlin, Welbeck etc and expect them to defend with the odd counter attack. They are quick, fast, pacey players and should be alowed to have freedom to run with the ball all game and try and get as many goals as they want. The midfield/defence should be good enough to hold out the opposition.

Just going to repeat what SnakeXe said early about this being a great discussion/debate.

I'm currently having one in the football forum and it seems that the mentality taken is this is my opinion and you're wrong, which is a little bit frustrating when there isn't really a right or wrong answer. It's nice to have a debate where people seem to listen and take on board your points of view even if they strongly disagree with them.

I doubt many people will agree with me or at least they don't agree where I work, which is filled with muppets that have no knowledge of football outside of the EPL. I think we need a manager and a system that has the guts to drop all the players that have let us down for so long, the only older player I would keep around would be Ashley Cole he usually plays pretty well and is in my opinion one of if not the best left back in the world on his day. I think Rio, Barry, Gerrard, Terry and Lampard all need dropping they have had too many chances for my liking. My ideal England team at the moment would be.

With a front three made up of three from Wayne Rooney, Daniel Sturridge, Adam Johnson, Danny Welbeck, Theo Walcott or even Aaron Lennon.

Another point that people might not agree with is in my eyes the FA should give a role to Dario Gradi the guy might be close to 70 years old but he has constantly got youth players coming through at Crewe. These players might not make it to the top leagues but he gives them chances no matter what there physical size and encourages them to play football. I am not sure what he could actually do but surely the FA could use his extensive experience on getting a decent coaching system up and running that encourages a more technical approach for players at a young age.

The football forum like many other football forums has too many people who view their own opinion as fact in here I think the atmosphere is directed more towards a good conversation and debate. Also I could never see it getting petty and argumentative in here like it does in there at times.

Can't argue too much with the lineup, both different from the usual flops in a lot of places (though I've been a fan of Baines for years), and still looks good. Gradi was a bit of a surprise, and has actually made me think about how much a manager's status should matter, as my first thoughts were 'surely not' for that very same reason, and appointing someone without top-flight experience would be something that would not-unreasonably be questioned, despite the logic when examining what Gradi has done.

I don't think Gradi should be the proper manager I just think he should be given a role within the FA.

I believe no matter who is appointed the national team will suffer the same fate as it usually does, qualify pretty easily for the tournament, stumble through the group then get knocked out again one of the top nations.

I like your line up as well my only problem with it is Ashley Young for some reason I really do not like him. I think Chamberlain will be a great player eventually and despite a lack of experience I see no reason why he should not at least go to the Euro's. Once Rio and Vidic retire, leave or start to drop out of the Man United team I would pick Smalling and Jones starting for England especially if they are starting together for Man United. Personally I would prefer Micah Richards or Kyle Walker ahead of Glen Johnson especially against teams with strong left sided attackers.

I think England really are short on the left besides Ashley Cole I consider us weak at fullback and on the left wing.

Richards and Walker are both brilliant full backs but recently Johnson has shown he has that finishing touch and skill to get into the box past players that Richards and Walker don't have. I suppose that comes down to who you play, against smaller teams Johnson could actually get a few goals but against bigger teams Richards is probably the better as you'd want your full backs to stay put.

You're right about left back, apart from Cole, Baines and possibly Walker (Naughton at a long shot) then we don't really have many if any good enough and Walker/Naughton would be on the wrong side of play.

With a front three made up of three from Wayne Rooney, Daniel Sturridge, Adam Johnson, Danny Welbeck, Theo Walcott or even Aaron Lennon.

That lineup looks good to me too. It really is time to drop the old geezers (bar Parker and Cole). The future lies with Smalling and Jones at the back and Cleverley and Wilshere in the middle anyway, so why not start giving them international experience now? Wilshere is probably already a starter when fit, but the three others ought to be as well.

Then one can discuss what tactical system should be employed. The "numbers game" is one thing (4-3-3 v 4-2-3-1 etc), but the main thing is how the players perform in the system; that the players and the system complement each other and favour the strengths the current English players have. Maybe Redknapp will be able to do that, but I'm not sure how he will cope when up against the more tricky tactics and players of the top teams in the world (and Europe for that matter). Then again, Tottenham isn't exactly doing crap at the moment, and he's up against some top-notch managers there too.

Will be unfortunate to see him leave Spurs though. They've really blossomed under his leadership, and if he leaves and they don't get in another good manager I can see players like Modric leaving in the summer. Maybe he will anyway given what happened last summer. Interesting times ahead no matter what though, and hopefully England can do a little better. Though I must still maintain that they have not really underperformed, because their real level is being knocked out one or two matches after the group stage.

Guus Hiddink is available though, and I think the FA will be crazy if they don't check him out. It looks set to be Harry for the longer term, mind, and perhaps it will end up with Pearce taking them to the Euros. The FA have really dicked this one up, haven't they? Such a terrible time to indirectly chase Capello away.

I can't see them looking at any managers bar English ones, they'll want to make sure the majority are happy and I don't know many people that would prefer or be happy with another foreign manager in charge. I'm not saying they wont be as good etc, they could be better but it goes back to the whole, we are England and should be managed by an English manager.

I like the approach Scotland took, Craig Levine had a good CV, was Scottish and although he'd never managed one of the Galsgow clubs, they took him. Even if someone like Dario Gradi, or a Championship manager was put in charge, I'd still be happy.

I think Hiddink would be my preferred choice but I also think the FA will feel pressured by sections of the media and a lot of fans that want an English manager. I read in the papers today to get Harry and his staff it could cost up to £30 million, obviously that figure must take into account wages and such. That is a disgrace I am sure there are better ways to spend £30 million than that. Then again this could simply be paper talk.

I feel a bit sorry for Spurs but it was suggested today on Sunday Supplement(for those who don't know/watch it is a program on Sky where four journalists discuss the footballing events of the week) that Harry could lead them into the Euro's with Stuart Pearce taking over after the Euro's. Might sound crazy but I would be in favour of this if the FA did no appoint Hiddink.

I am probably blinkered by being a Sunderland fan but Shearer would be awful, I would pick Gary Neville over him.

I have started my You Tube channel and started up the series I will doing, a Fifa 12 manager mode career taking AFC Wimbledon to the Premier League (hopefully) signing only youth players. I posted the 1st video last week and have just posted the 2nd video (episode). My microphone wasn't working for the 1st episode for some reason but got it all fixed for the 2nd.

If you could like and subscribe that would be great! I really hope this series picks up speed as I enjoy doing them so much. So yeah, I'm begging you to subscribe, watch, like, rate etc

Apart from a short stint with Newcastle (where he did pretty poorly if I recall) he has zero experience though. Does he even have coaching badges? If he is half as clueless as he is on TV, it would be a disaster anyway.

A lot of big English names have and will retire over the next few years. Will be interesting to see if (m)any of them choose to go into management. Must say I was a little surprised Gary Neville didn't, but it was probably a good choice. Certainly does a good job commenting and analysing. It's only a slight exaggeration to say he is the lone sane voice in a the madhouse.

We sometimes get Dutch commentators (wink-wink) and it is a delight. Don't understand much of what they say, but it's an advantage over some the loons that comment on Sky et al.

To be fair, you are only describing a certain section of the media here. You are describing typical headlines from trashy tabloid newspapers such as The Sun!

We do have quality sports writing in this country, you know! I think you're being a little unfair about the media here. We have some of the best football writers in the world (and also some of the worst too no doubt!) and they definitely shouldn't be tarnished with the same brush as the sensationalised tabloid rags!

Eh, I don't know about that. I've seen some shockingly blinkered writing from even the more "respectable" papers like the Telegraph (granted, not nearly as much as the Sun or the Mirror). Even Henry Winter can be abysmal at times.

I think the issue is that players get into a comfort zone in the Premier League and don't see a reason for them to leave. Hopefully we'll see the new generation of more technically able players like Sturridge, Wilshere and Johnson head abroad at some point, but I won't hold my breath. It's a shame because it really improved Beckham's game, and Joe Cole has been reborn at Lille.

"I hated living in Italy. It was like being in foreign country."

Interestingly, this has also been cited as a reason why the Mexican team never gets past the QF. Because the Mexican clubs pay so well (and regularly), that players have no need to chase Spanish or English paycheques. Contrast with a nation like Argentina or Brazil, where the pay might be more, shall we say, irregular. (Granted this was about 10 years ago, but when Christian Gomez signed with DC United and was asked what difference he noticed between football in Argentina and in the US, his response was "The cheques come on time" in the US)

Shearer would be an abysmal choice for England, the man is an utter tool. I'll always love him as a player and some of my greatest memories are thanks to him, but he is a moron and would be comfortably the worst England manager of all time. I'd quite like him to take a managerial job just to stop him embarrassing himself weekly on MOTD but not one quite so close to home, thanks!

I think for Redknapp the question to him is whether he thinks he could win something with England. If he thinks so then (he's an idiot) he has to take it, if not then he should go nowhere near it. He's got a team at Spurs which is right on the verge of competing for major trophies across the board. For me it's a choice between a 1% chance of being a national hero and a 75% chance of being a Spurs hero. I'd take the latter every time, regardless of my own allegiance.

In response to HC about 'Arry being a great club manager, I'd meet you more halfway and say he's a great cheque-book manager. Which isn't a bad thing - there's plenty of managers who completely trip over their own feet when given a lot of money to spend. He completely failed at Southampton and arguably should have done far better with West Ham considering he had the likes of Di Canio, Rio Ferdinand, Frank Lampard, Joe Cole, Michael Carrick, and Jermain Defoe at his disposal. He did very well at Portsmouth of course, and is doing a great job at Spurs. His greatest achievement for me was the run-in where Spurs and Man City were going for the final CL spot and he got some excellent results against the other top-6 clubs to take it. However he couldn't repeat that last season, and I think he's missed a trick this season - Spurs could have had a really really good chance at the title if they'd spent well in January. I just don't think Saha and Nelsen are PL-winning signings. He's gone for consolidating 3rd rather than reaching for 1st, which is a shame considering his attacking instincts on the pitch.

Finally, to add a bit to the "where do England go next" debate: what about doing a Spain and basing the national side around our most successful club?

7 players, including three quarters of the defence and a strike partnership already gelled at club level. Yes it means leaving out some great players like Sturridge, Johnson, Walker and Richards, but playing as a team would potentially offer far more than the difference between those and the ones chosen.

I'd hate to see Shearer as manager, I was just saying I'm surprised he hasn't been mentioned although I don't think he's got the badges, he was only caretaker at Newcastle and I think you can have 12 weeks as caretaker without any badges, he ended up getting them relegated although I wouldn't blame it on him at all.

Fair enough Snake I'll take your point about Redknapp although I wouldn't dismiss Saha or Nelsen yet, correct me if I'm wrong but didn't Saha win a Premier League title with Man Utd? And they were both on a free so he hasn't spent anything. I don't think they will win it this season but they can and they shouldn't give up. It looks like they'll get 3rd at least which means Champions League next season so I hope Arry stays because he hasn't done anything wrong in the transfer market as of yet and should be able to build a great team that might be a lot closer next season? Although we said that about Arsenals youth: When they are at their peak they'll be title challengers, maybe not in the end.

I quite like that team and I can see the logic in picking a settled squad that's already gelled. It definitely seems the feeling is that all the old players like Lampard and Gerrard should be ditched however have you heard what Harry had to say this morning? If he takes the job then he'll ask for Scholes to come out of international retirement. It'll be interesting if he does and I for one, would take him back. He seems to have come straight back into Manchester United with ease and is probably better than last season, no matter what SnakeXe thought

I'm quite content at being right about Scholes. But to be frank I hadn't expected him to play as much as he has. I think the layoff has been good for him. He's been properly rested, which I guess a footballer of that age needs. He probably wants it more too now, having been away from the game and seen how much he misses it.

He could probably do a good job for England now tbh, but I'm not sure he wants to. Well, I think he wants to, but he is an intelligent man and may well conclude his body can't take those extra matches and travel if he wants to be his best for Manchester United. But Scholes in a midfield 3 with Parker and Wilshere/Cleverley could certainly work quite well.

No doubt Harry has done well with Tottenham this season, but we should perhaps also factor in that they have played with virtually the same squad the whole season with few injury problems. The squad isn't particularly thick behind the first eleven, so if they got a few key players injured at the same time I'm pretty sure their results would suffer. There is a bigger risk of that happening next season with CL football again. Always a bit tricky when the "must-win" matches come thick and fast after Xmas, often with great opponents twice a week. You need a big squad to handle that, and I'm not sure Tottenham have that. They have the summer to fix it up somewhat, but it's a big step and a big risk if they don't qualify again.

In any case, Redknapp looks a dead cert for taking over England. I think the only question is whether he does it now and takes them into the Euros, or if he wants to take over with a clean sheet after the (inevitable) poor England performance in the Euros.

Calling back Scholes may not necessarily be a bad sign because he has played great since his comeback, but I do hope he plans to rejuvenate the squad by going for the talented youths we have talked so much about here and strongly limit the caps the older players get.

Such a lose-lose scenario for him though. There is (virtually) zero chance of winning anything with England. Go with the old guard and the press will lament him for not changing anything, walking in old tracks and failing again, etc. Go with the young talented players, and if good results and play is not instant, he'll be lamented for not going for the big names that have been successful at club level. We know how the press works. Not strong on sense, but keen on sensationalist headlines. They're also in a "praise Harry" phase now. They'd love to turn into "burn the f*cker" mode.

The last paragraph reminds me of something that got me furiours the other day. The way (mainly The Sun) seem to control everything, they want 'arry to be the manager and therefore they say how he's innocent, best man alive, god etc where as Stuart Pearce, who has sat quietly and said nothing, done nothing, just got on with the daily life gets ragged through the mud again over an accusation of racism, what? 18 odd years ago? Un-f***ing-believable. I know he hasn't done great with the U21's but I wouldn't blame he for it at all and anyway the fact that the Sun seem to ignore Harry was in court only last week spilling lies about this that and the other is incredilous.

It was a bonus, Milan is wrong, it was a bonus, I'm telling ya. Whatever Milan has said it's wrong.

Then suddenly, no, it's not a bonus, it's what Milan is saying it is.

How he got away with it I'll never know. Scrap that, I do know. Cos he's arry fooking Redknapp.

7 players, including three quarters of the defence and a strike partnership already gelled at club level. Yes it means leaving out some great players like Sturridge, Johnson, Walker and Richards, but playing as a team would potentially offer far more than the difference between those and the ones chosen.

I think that is a good idea, but players shouldn't automatically walk into the starting 11 just because they play for Man Utd. Playing one of Jones/Smalling as an adapted right-back instead of Micah Richards who is far more accomplished in the position, just because it'd make for a 3 man Man Utd defence, would do way more harm than good in my opinion.

I could see a Man Utd based side lining up like this. Same tactic that Utd plays, that hybrid between old school 4-4-2 and modern 4-2-3-1 with Rooney withdrawn and the wingers pushed forward:

Hart

Richards
A. Cole
Jones
Ferdinand/Smalling

Parker/Barry
Wilshere

Young
A. Johnson
Rooney

Wellbeck

This way you'd have the benefits of a duo of Utd centre-backs and a trio of Utd attacking players, based around their tactics. With the extra bonus of a gelled City right-wing with Johnson + Richards. Another bonus is the fact Young likes to come into the centre a bit, adding creativity and leaving space for Ashley Cole to bomb forward since he's fairly able to take care of the left-wing by himself. Theo Walcott and Daniel Sturridge would then be prime substitutes, capable of filling in in the right or as central striker, I could see Sturridge even able to adapt himself to a left-wing role, filling Young's shoes as a winger who cuts inside and shoots. He is a right footed striker adept at finishing who managed to adapt himself to the right wing very well thanks to his pace, that sound ideal for that left-wing role, why not try that once at least?

There is one issue with this tactic/line-up and it is absolutely crucial in modern football: getting the midfield right. With two attacking wingers + an attacking midfielder who is more of a striker than an attacking midfielder, to compensate for that you need 2 players very well adept at defending and covering a large amount of space. The best english central midfielders at the moment are Scott Parker and Jack Wilshere but I'm not sure that would work well - too soft/attacking-minded a pairing for this role. Gareth Barry would fill in better but leave Wilshere out and you're severely depriving the side from creativity (no playmaker - Rooney isn't a creator, the inspiration would have to come almost solely from Young, and Johnson's sole trickery). Leave Parker out and that's the most charismatic leader of the side out. There's other options like Michael Carrick (Man Utd bonus, excellent passing ability and understanding of the game, but little space covered), the dreaded old school of Gerrard/Lampard, the exciting but very inexperienced Cleverley, a desperate rescuing of grandad Scholes, none of them seem a proper solution.

Perhaps an alternative if the midfield doesn't click is compromise the attack, leave Wellbeck out, play Rooney as sole striker and field Barry-Parker-Wilshere. In a modern 4-3-3/4-5-1, balancing the midfield perfectly. This in turn ruins the chemistry of the Rooney-Wellbeck striker duo and puts Rooney in a role he doesn't play often nor very well, but he used to be a quality striker in the Euro 2004 days, and creates little from the withdrawn striker position anyway, why not try it?

Oxlade-Chamberlain seems a very exciting player too, but I don't know enough about him, he's sort of an attacking midfielder I think? Perhaps he could slide into the Ashley Young left-wing/cut-inside role. Or as an alternative to Rooney as AMC when he's not available - and isn't Rooney out for the first 2 Euro matches?

Is this debate/discussion making anyone else want to start an FM save with England?

I feel a sequel to Fabio Crouchello might well appear on the forums at some point in the not too distant future.

Perhaps 'Harry Crouchknapp' will be coming soon to an FM Career Updates forum near you!

*AcidBurn also likes this*

For me we really lack a goal scorer, Rooney is great at dropping deep and Welbeck is only going to get better. The trouble is neither fill me with confidence when they go through on goal, I like both players and hope Welbeck can become that goal scorer we need. I put Welbeck in my starting line up but if I was playing a 4-4-2 I would prefer Rooney and Bent, if you can create chances for Bent he will score them or at least he did when he played for us.

Do you think Andy Carroll will ever become England class? I would love us to have a big target man playing especially with Ashley Young as much as I dislike him he can cross a ball perfectly.

I know it has already been said but I really do enjoy taking part in these sort of conversations on here.

I think that is a good idea, but players shouldn't automatically walk into the starting 11 just because they play for Man Utd.

Absolutely, but if they're fit and in form and bring a pre-developed team ethic and mentality from their club then it will help create a national team ethic and identity. Once this is established you can start bringing in a couple of others who are individually better, they'll be coming into a confident and (hopefully) winning team and this will create a better whole in the long term.

I do like the team you mention (forget Barry though, he's been good for about 3 months of the last 2 years).

I could see Sturridge even able to adapt himself to a left-wing role, filling Young's shoes as a winger who cuts inside and shoots. He is a right footed striker adept at finishing who managed to adapt himself to the right wing very well thanks to his pace, that sound ideal for that left-wing role, why not try that once at least?

He's left-footed isn't he?

The best english central midfielders at the moment are Scott Parker and Jack Wilshere but I'm not sure that would work well - too soft/attacking-minded a pairing for this role.

I think they'd do just fine. Wilshere puts himself about enough for a smallish guy, and Parker is in a rich vein of form as a ball-winning midfielder for Spurs. Don't forget the much-vaunted Germany side of WC2010 had Schweinsteiger - a converted right winger - in the Wilshere role. Khedira isn't exactly a pitbull either, he's more of a classy defensive midfielder with decent touch and vision, like Parker on a good day.

Oxlade-Chamberlain seems a very exciting player too, but I don't know enough about him, he's sort of an attacking midfielder I think? Perhaps he could slide into the Ashley Young left-wing/cut-inside role. Or as an alternative to Rooney as AMC when he's not available - and isn't Rooney out for the first 2 Euro matches?

He's basically Walcott with a brain. If he continues his current form until the end of the season he should definitely start at the Euros.

Originally Posted by crouchaldinho

Is this debate/discussion making anyone else want to start an FM save with England?

I feel a sequel to Fabio Crouchello might well appear on the forums at some point in the not too distant future.

Perhaps 'Harry Crouchknapp' will be coming soon to an FM Career Updates forum near you!

Do iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiit

Originally Posted by AcidBurn

For me we really lack a goal scorer, Rooney is great at dropping deep and Welbeck is only going to get better. The trouble is neither fill me with confidence when they go through on goal, I like both players and hope Welbeck can become that goal scorer we need. I put Welbeck in my starting line up but if I was playing a 4-4-2 I would prefer Rooney and Bent, if you can create chances for Bent he will score them or at least he did when he played for us.

The problem with Bent is he's a complete passenger when he's not scoring goals. If Welbeck or Sturridge aren't scoring they're still causing problems for defenders. Bent on form is formidable, but he's not really been in that sort of form since his first few months with Villa.

Originally Posted by Pangaea

Let's put it this way, I hope England won't have to play Carroll up front. How Newcastle got 35 million for him I'll never know.

Because love them or loathe them, Derek Llambias and Mike Ashley are excellent businessmen. However, having watched him first-hand for the 18-odd months he was first choice for us, he was absolutely outstanding for the latter 12. He absolutely bullied opposition defenders, and was pretty much unbeatable in the air. In the opening day 3-0 defeat for us at Old Trafford when we were promoted, the commentators were laughing at him for missing a half-chance with his head, saying it wasn't befitting of a Newcastle number 9. However he absolutely dominated Vidic in the air - how often does that happen? - and with a bit more support we might have nicked a goal or two. We'd still have lost, mind, with Perch at right back.

He absolutely looked the real deal, like a Geordie Drogba, and was probably worth around £15m due to the young-and-English premium. The reason Liverpool ended up paying £35m is that he wasn't for sale and didn't want to leave, except in the circumstances of a stupid bid like that. Even so at the time I was absolutely gutted. I loved watching him play in a black-and-white shirt, and I felt physically sick seeing the pictures of him having his medical in a Liverpool shirt. I don't take any pleasure at all in seeing him struggle.

Will probably wait for the patch though. Aren't we due one soon with a data update? Usually around Valentine's day, isn't it?

I'm not joking, I really have been that cut off from GD during recent months. I don't miss the 'when's the patch' threads! I honestly have no idea when the patch is out and with Steam doing the updating now maybe I already have it and I haven't noticed!

I haven't been on there for so long, I've mostly forgotten how bad it can get.

Is it quieter on there these days or about the same AB?

To be honest, playing the game without any knowledge of the nonsense talked about on GD is quite nice, almost liberating in fact!

It's not too bad in there the most annoying threads are the steam ones and people claiming the game is scripted and fixed. In my opinion there are very rarely any threads that bring about a good discussion.